Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Balch: The reason I mention it is because I've talked with applicants that have <br /> done workshop and then walked away and we've said something and then we've said <br /> something later and it is completely contradictory to what we said before. I'm just saying, I <br /> remember we've said, or at least a few of us said, this Residence 1 possibly having a different <br /> use on the ground floor does create the parking issue that we're talking about now and I <br /> acknowledge it and I just want to say we know we're contradicting...I know I'm contradicting <br /> myself. <br /> Chair Ritter: Good point, until we know the plan. <br /> Commissioner Balch: Until we know the final plan. <br /> Commissioner Allen: May I ask just a follow-up to Commissioner Balch's question that I think <br /> would be helpful for us to clarify. So to your point, if we do create the Old Bernal building, we're <br /> creating an additional gap we know of three more commercial/retail spots, right? <br /> Commissioner Balch: Well, that's where my question came up because if you have a mixed <br /> use, two per residence, and it all depends on how they would redesign Residence 1... <br /> Commissioner Nagler: It's one space per 300 square feet so it depends on how many square <br /> feet we're talking about. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor: But how many units go upstairs? <br /> Commissioner Allen: Let's just pretend it's duplicated and it creates more parking demand, and <br /> this also prompts the question of guest parking because there's now going to be six potential <br /> studios. So it does prompt the question to us then of should we ask the developer to therefore <br /> consider changing the footprint of the other two residences such that they can meet the <br /> parking requirement while still allowing one car per studio. And my answer to that is yes, I think <br /> we should at least have a proposal to show how they would meet the commercial aspect as <br /> well as our give of one resident car per studio. <br /> Commissioner Balch: I'm actually going to go to where Commissioner Nagler said earlier. <br /> Personally I would not redesign. I think the exercise, and that's why I say I only toss my hat in <br /> a little bit because for me to get Residence 1 converted to mixed use in any manner, it can be <br /> an exercise that can be had on the back of a cocktail napkin, but if it gets to where it's <br /> infeasible I'm out and I'm back to the original project that was proposed. <br /> Commissioner Nagler: Me too. And also Commissioner Allen, you said something that went <br /> way beyond at least what I was suggesting which is, if by chance there is mixed use created in <br /> Residence 1 that by implication the rest of the building would be studio apartments and I don't' <br /> know if that's true. Just to be clear about what we're saying. It could be a residence. It could be <br /> a live/work. <br /> Commissioner Allen: Right. <br /> Chair Ritter: I think we have some really good conversations for the staff and applicant on this. <br /> Did you get enough on that bullet? <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2016 Page 18 of <br /> 22 <br />